This was posted 5 years 4 months 24 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

LEGO Star Wars Millennium Falcon 75192 $974.25 Delivered @ David Jones

870
LEGO Star Wars Millennium Falcon 75192 $974.25 Delivered @ David Jones
Go to Deal
Cashback
bowtiehoon on 01/12/2018 - 23:03 davidjones.com (3683 clicks)
Last edited 02/12/2018 - 09:55 by 2 other users

Currently for the tempting price of $974.25 in case anyone is interested

I'm mega tempted since I have enough in DJs vouchers (10% off from entertainment book) … which brings it down to $876.82 but i don't even have enough time for Red Dead two let alone pick up another hobbie :(

Its part of this sale:
SAVE 25% ON ALL FULL-PRICED TOYS. DISCOUNT APPLIED IN SHOPPING BAG.
Not available in conjunction with any other offer. While stocks last. Offer available until 09/12/2018.

Edit: Its been pointed out Cash Rewards now pay out on David Jones on purchases made with giftcards! That's an extra $48.71 (5%) off so its even cheaper!

Toys & Kids Building Blocks Star Wars LEGO

Related Stores

David Jones
David Jones

closed Comments

  • Merlict on 01/12/2018 - 23:07
    +4

    To be clear DJs have 25% off all lego, only displays when you add to cart because their website is garbage.

    • bowtiehoon on 01/12/2018 - 23:10

      cool, ok I've updated the posting so hopefully its clearer

  • rartelif on 01/12/2018 - 23:19
    +3

    To be honest, most AFOLs has already got MF, so even 25% off discount this time, there are heaps stock across VIC store, FOMO of this set is gone, Resellers from this site have already started being upset about how to make profit.

    • bowtiehoon on 01/12/2018 - 23:29

      i'm def not a AFOLs (had to look it up), I think there is still a market for the adult kid who thinks this would look awesome in his study lol

      • rartelif on 01/12/2018 - 23:38

        You should buy it, after that the only thing you need to consider is how or where should you display this masterpiece.

  • bowtiehoon on 01/12/2018 - 23:22
    +2

    Actually I can get it down even more…
    3 X $250 vouchers after discount is $675
    $224.25 rest on Amex, minus $30 from amex deal so it ends up being $869.25

    sigh…decisions decisions…

    • darthsparrow on 01/12/2018 - 23:34

      Do it!

    • jelko on 01/12/2018 - 23:47
      +8

      Don't do it You're wasting your money and you'll be the laughing stock of your friends.

      • [Deactivated] on 02/12/2018 - 01:42
        +4

        But we’re their only friends.

    • hanofee on 02/12/2018 - 00:28
      +1

      Don’t forget shopback or cashrewards too?

      • bowtiehoon on 02/12/2018 - 00:40

        I already looked into it, i think David Jones reject your cash back if use vouchers. But yeah good for those who can't get DJs vouchers

        • edsnails on 02/12/2018 - 07:26
          +1

          Can use gift cards to pay with cash rewards:

          “Important Change: Cashback will not be paid on the purchase of Gift Cards. Cashback will be paid when Gift Cards are used as a payment method.”

          • bowtiehoon on 02/12/2018 - 09:26

            @edsnails: Whoa when did they change it?!

            Nooo I wasn’t going to buy this, but for an extra 5%, that’s another $49 bucks off… I’m tempted again… first world problems lol

  • Ulysses31 on 01/12/2018 - 23:33
    +6

    Lego is awesome
    Star Wars is awesome

    But HOW could this be worth this amounta coin?!!

    $/piece scales accordingly? It's got 10000 pieces?

    • cnut on 01/12/2018 - 23:55

      7,000 I think.

    • bowtiehoon on 02/12/2018 - 00:17

      Apparently, generally LEGO sets cost about 17 cents per brick

      • RiotDealz on 02/12/2018 - 03:21

        If you can afford it and it makes you happy I say go for it, however if you are hurting physically about buying then probably not this time:) Its a awesome set for sure!

    • greatlamp on 02/12/2018 - 15:23
      +1

      It's aimed at the collectibles market. Adults will be buying these for themselves, and putting it in a display cabinet.

      People pay hundreds of dollars for a signed poster

  • cyrax83 on 01/12/2018 - 23:35

    Already have it as do most afols. Amazing set and worth every cent even at RRP of $1,299

  • tassieeagle on 01/12/2018 - 23:36
    +9

    I don't get it sorry, I love Star Wars but a grand for Lego????

    • The Gent on 02/12/2018 - 10:32
      +1

      It actually reaches lightspeed.

      • darthsparrow on 02/12/2018 - 13:39

        Luke: What a piece of junk!

        Han: She’ll make point five past lightspeed. She may not look like much, but she's got it where it counts, kid. I've made a lot of special modifications myself.

        • muncan on 02/12/2018 - 13:42

          Did we ever see her push point five over? Like a screen gab confirmation from the dash?

    • rartelif on 01/12/2018 - 23:40
      -2

      Can you just shut up and leave this thread or simply “help people to save money”(your own words) by posting a separate Lepin deal?

        • muncan on 01/12/2018 - 23:44

          Can we all just shut up? No? Fair enough.

        • rartelif on 01/12/2018 - 23:44

          Good on you mate, do some Lepin business then, surely for your kindness you would be a “successful” business man.

        • cnut on 01/12/2018 - 23:56
          +5

          Lepin is shit. Not to mention people shouldn’t support companies that can’t even come up with their own products.

          And it’s there not their.

          • unifex on 02/12/2018 - 00:20

            @cnut: Much better in that LEGO invested in this kit and licensing and lepin steps in and rips off LEGO under cutting them. Sure don’t buy it because it’s too expensive but don’t buy the pirate one because it’s cheaper because your not making a reasonable comparison.

    • neirboca on 02/12/2018 - 15:02
      +1

      Are you taking about SPACE WARS or STAR WEINERS?.

    • sparkles on 02/12/2018 - 19:01

      The irony that Most Wanted comments are Not Wanted. Lepin is for losers.

  • AMLagonda on 01/12/2018 - 23:43

    I do not have this…. am I missing out?

    • muncan on 01/12/2018 - 23:46
      +10

      Save $974.25 and click here

      • cnut on 01/12/2018 - 23:57

        Saved me a grand and a ton of time and space. Thank you.

      • bowtiehoon on 02/12/2018 - 00:34

        Holy crap! that video was awesome and …daunting!

        OK i'm out! lol

      • nonpop on 02/12/2018 - 07:46

        Thanks for that clip!

      • Infraction on 02/12/2018 - 10:54

        Ok the soundtrack is cool, those green pieces would bug me though, why include off colour pieces

      • solidussnake on 02/12/2018 - 15:59

        I was exhausted after watching that haha

      • sparkles on 02/12/2018 - 19:09

        Wow, he looked like an experienced builder and it still took 23 hours. Watching that made my fingers hurt.

    • flashi007 on 01/12/2018 - 23:57
      +3

      No it’s not.

      • HomeAlone on 02/12/2018 - 00:08

        Why not?

        • flashi007 on 02/12/2018 - 00:12
          +1

          See cnuts comment above.

          • HomeAlone on 02/12/2018 - 00:19
            +1

            @flashi007: Skipping through the 4-part side by side build series on youtube the Lepin seems to be pretty much identical.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bed1FyUtehw

            People here upvote those Star Wars 3D metallic models even though they are fake. I'm just curious why this is any different, especially when the saving is much more.

            • unifex on 02/12/2018 - 00:21

              @HomeAlone: Because LEGO pays licensing to Disney and paid their employees to come up with the design. Lepin did not.

    • dono2 on 02/12/2018 - 12:33

      thanks for the tip, i bought a couple of Lepins this morning, never knew about it before. Lego is such a rip off.

      • Clear on 02/12/2018 - 14:43

        Check out LEPIN on Reddit. Big following with a lot good guides and best palaces to buy.

  • DEvok on 02/12/2018 - 00:06
    -1

    For plastic that is made in China, once you put this together it just stays in that one spot to collect dust, true waste of money, it is hard earned money that could be spend upon more useful ways. For LEGO fans that’s just my own personal opinion no offence.

    • flashi007 on 02/12/2018 - 00:17
      +9

      I’m not really sure why people come onto lego posts and state it’s a waste of money?

      It’s just plastic bricks! It’s just a toy!!! It will just collect dust!!!

      I have never felt the need to comment on posts I think are a waste of money

      • HomeAlone on 02/12/2018 - 00:33
        +2

        I have never felt the need to comment on posts I think are a waste of money

        I don't believe you. Challenge accepted.

        • HomeAlone on 02/12/2018 - 00:48

          flashi007 on 22/10/2016
          I've heard these are crap
          https://www.ozbargain.com.au/comment/4104152/redir

          • caprimulgus on 02/12/2018 - 01:24
            -1

            @HomeAlone: Commenting that a product is bad quality (helpful to the orbargain community) is COMPLETELY different from commenting that something is a waste of money (completely pointless).

            Challenge failed.

            • HomeAlone on 02/12/2018 - 01:26
              -3

              @caprimulgus:

              I have never felt the need to comment on posts I think are a waste of money

              If you think something is CRAP then it's a waste of money is it not?

              • caprimulgus on 02/12/2018 - 01:30
                +1

                @HomeAlone: Your failure to distinguish between the two says more about your reading comprehension skills than anything else.

                You are misinterpreting the sentence. He is saying that he would not comment on a post simply to say something is a waste of money (ie. it is useless) like the OP did. He is not saying he would never comment on anything that he thinks is a waste of money (because it is crap quality).

                Saying something is crap is a comment on the quality. It implies that the product is a waste of money, but it is not a comment being made simply for the sake of saying it is a waste of money. The point of the comment is to discuss the quality, not to make a point of the uselessness of the product (even if that is implied, due to the quality).

                They are completely different comments dude. You failed. Move on with your life.

                • HomeAlone on 02/12/2018 - 01:38
                  -5

                  @caprimulgus:

                  You are misinterpreting the sentence

                  No. Clearly you are.

                  It says:

                  I have never felt the need to comment on posts I think are a waste of money

                  Not: I have never felt the need to comment on posts to say it is a waste of money

                  Saying something is crap is a comment on the quality. It implies that the product is a waste of money, but it is not a comment being made simply for the sake of saying it is a waste of money.

                  EXACTLY and what did they do? They COMMENTED on the post so clearly they have felt the need to comment on such posts.

                  • caprimulgus on 02/12/2018 - 01:48
                    +2

                    @HomeAlone: Dude, really?

                    For anyone with more than 2 brain cells, it is clear the intended meaning of the sentence is:

                    I have never felt the need to comment on posts [simply to say] I think [they are] are a waste of money

                    Anyone with reading comprehension past primary school would interpret that sentence in that way.

                    But whatever, dude. Congratulations on your super-semantic “win”. I hope you feel good about yourself that you were able to misinterpret someone’s comment, and call them out on their “hypocrisy”!!!

                    How dare they be so hypocritical!!!

                    Ps. If you REALLY want to be semantic, he said he never “felt the need”. That doesn’t mean he “would never post”. Just because he never NEEDS to post, doesn’t mean he never WANTS to post. He didn’t NEED to say it was crap - he just wanted to!

                    See, I can win at semantics too! I won!

                    So you can accept the true meaning of the sentence, and fail. Or you can be semantic, and I’ll raise your semantics, and you still fail. Either way, you still fail!

                    • HomeAlone on 02/12/2018 - 01:54
                      -3

                      @caprimulgus:

                      Ps. If you REALLY want to be semantic, he said he never “felt the need”. That doesn’t mean he “would never post”. Just because he never NEEDS to post, doesn’t mean he never WANTS to post. He didn’t NEED to say it was crap - he just wanted to!

                      Felt is past tense. Clearly they already felt the need because they did it.

                      See, I can win at semantics too! I won!

                      No, actually you didn't. You only showed us that you have trouble grasping several different things.

                      • caprimulgus on 02/12/2018 - 02:01

                        @HomeAlone: Not sure why I expected you to understand my point, when you clearly are not very literate…

                        My comment was a play on the interpretation of “need” (ie. distinguishing between need vs want). The tense of the word “felt” is completely irrelevant to that point.

                        But whatever, dude. You “need” to learn how to read English more good.

                        You only showed us that you have trouble grasping several different things.

                        LOL. Irony much?

                        • HomeAlone on 02/12/2018 - 02:03
                          -2

                          @caprimulgus:

                          But whatever, dude. You “need” to learn how to read English more good.

                          The word you're looking for is better

                          • caprimulgus on 02/12/2018 - 02:04
                            +2

                            @HomeAlone: Nope, that was very much intentional. ;)

                            (But just like everything else, the joke went over your head!)

                            • HomeAlone on 02/12/2018 - 02:07
                              -2

                              @caprimulgus: I hope you're not considering a career in comedy.

                              • caprimulgus on 02/12/2018 - 02:10
                                +2

                                @HomeAlone: Nope. Just like I hope you’re not considering a career that requires reading comprehension and interpretation of meaning.

                                Because you would do equally as well as I would do at comedy! (Just in case you can’t interpret this, I mean we would both be very bad at those respective things!)

                                • HomeAlone on 02/12/2018 - 02:12
                                  -3

                                  @caprimulgus:

                                  Just like I hope you’re not considering a career that requires reading comprehension and interpretation of meaning.

                                  Too late. I already have such a career and I do very well :)

                                  • trendkill on 02/12/2018 - 02:49
                                    +7

                                    @HomeAlone: Saltiest argument I've seen in ages here. Good read, thanks guys

                                    • ChiefAJ on 02/12/2018 - 03:33
                                      +5

                                      @trendkill:

                                      Saltiest argument I've seen in ages here. Good read, thanks guys

                                      I don't believe you. Challenge accepted.

                                      .
                                      .
                                      .
                                      .
                                      .
                                      .
                                      .
                                      Nope. I can't do it. Sorry.

                              • Splashtash on 02/12/2018 - 10:19

                                @HomeAlone: I found it funny.. I should also be clear. I found the part it went over ur head.

                          • resubaehtgnolhcs on 02/12/2018 - 12:36

                            @HomeAlone: Wow, dude you clearly don't get sarcasm!

                            • HomeAlone on 02/12/2018 - 13:14

                              @resubaehtgnolhcs: I hear that all the time. My doctor reckons it's a symptom of my asperger's, but what the hell does he know.

    • Untameable on 02/12/2018 - 00:19
      +2

      Most anything can be extrapolated to be a waste of money.

      You can’t take money with you. Once the bills are paid spend it however makes you happy, even for a short time.

    • Siuto on 02/12/2018 - 00:31
      +1

      Or you can look at it this way. Lego sets tend to be worth more when they get discontinued or keeps it value. At least it doesn't depreciate like things such as electronics or cars. People buy TVs, computers, phones, cameras, smart watches etc and you can pretty much write them all off in 3 years. In my opinion, there are plenty of worse things to spend money on than Lego.

    • Cluster on 02/12/2018 - 00:58

      Lego is made in Denmark, Hungary, Mexico, Czech Republic, and China.

    • darthsparrow on 02/12/2018 - 13:42

      For a comment that is made in a LEGO deal post, once you post this up, it just stays in that one spot to collect downvotes, true waste of a comment. It is hard earned typing on a keyboard that could have been spent upon more bargains.

  • chakel on 02/12/2018 - 00:28

    Can confirm all lego is 25% in store and online, I bought the Ducati for $449 today from there.

    • sathz666 on 02/12/2018 - 01:37
      +1

      ducati? wahahahahhahah….dude…its bugatti ….unless im missing something …u do know 1 is a car and one is a motorcycle rite?

      • [Deactivated] on 02/12/2018 - 06:50

        probably he bought a knock off chinese one.

        • chakel on 02/12/2018 - 09:13

          she did not, i meant bugatti, for the bf of course i have no idea what i’m talking about.

  • HomeAlone on 02/12/2018 - 02:10
    -4

    LEGO

    NOT EVEN ONCE

    https://youtu.be/No9X4eQhWDI?t=110

  • solidussnake on 02/12/2018 - 03:11
    +2

    Almost $1k for plastic lol lol lol. Bring on the negs

    • itsdougie on 02/12/2018 - 09:25
      -1

      to be fair you get a binded book and some stickers too

  • [Deactivated] on 02/12/2018 - 08:17

    This model would be good with 25% off.

    Vestas-Wind-Turbine-10268

    Waiting waiting (forever, forever)

  • MathNerd on 02/12/2018 - 08:18
    -1

    Thanks OP. Bought 10.

    • [Deactivated] on 02/12/2018 - 08:25

      Is that you Broden?

  • Polypterus on 02/12/2018 - 08:41
    +1

    This sort of collectible used to fetch considerable resale value. I wonder how much the older version is fetching, now that Lego has reproduced (and keeps reissuing) retired & valuable sets?

    • CyberMurning on 02/12/2018 - 09:44

      fetching just like other second hand item once you open them. probably 70% if you lucky

  • DiscoJango on 02/12/2018 - 09:48

    i have the ucs super star destroyer. its pretty big and long, but not wide, so you have options on where to display. i have the previous version ucs millenium falcon. its too big, so i cannot make it, as there is literally no where to put it. unless new house.

    similar to living in small 1 bedroom city apartment, and deciding to get a german shepherd. dont do it.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join